Eric F. Richards wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote:

You make my point for me.

What, with my mention of the mexican stations targeting SD? That was
just an aside on cross-border stations.

IIRC, CKLW and WABC were well aware of their wide coverage area.

Again, the target audience is of limited
size. Because there's no practical sales value beyond a certain point.
Audience for CKLW is for practical purposes outside of the ADI,
unmeasurable. Where there is a measured audience, it's small compared to
the locals, and not saleable. But even if it were comparatively large,
and I've worked in markets downstate where WLS and WGN were rated and
contenders against the locals, there still wasn't a practical sales
value. So, for all intents that matter, that audience isn't a
consideration.

Actually, what I've gotten from this discussion is that even if the
tracking methods -- 800 numbers, "Mention you heard it here on...,"
etc. have all shown that there are listeners all beyond the target
areas. What happens is that the sales department doesn't like data
that doesn't fit their assumptions, and dismisses it out of hand.


Actually, it's a lot less sinister than that. It's that there are not
sufficient numbers of them to be saleable to advertisers. The fact is
that few people actually listen to any given station out of the local
coverage area. Skywave listening is still going on, but not in saleable
numbers. There is no mechanism for selling a widely scattered irregular,
unmeasured audience. For an audience to be saleable, it needs to be
measured, and fall in to the correct demographic, psychographic, and
geographic areas. A zip code with less than 100 listeners, is
statistically zero. A zip code with an unreliable signal is of no value.
Believe me, if the numbers supported it, WLS would have a sales
office in Shreveport, Louisiana. But the only one regularly listening
to WLS in Shreveport, was me, in 1984. There were a half dozen of my
friend in St Louis, who listened to WLS. Most of them were in Radio.
Most would prefer to listen to KXOK. The signal was stronger, clearer,
and more reliable. Even in the 60's there only pockets of listeners to
skywave activity. Widely scattered, occasional listeners are of no
statistical presence. And not saleable.

The bottom line is that there's a bottom line. And anything that
can't materially affect it is not considered.

That's the nature of Radio in the US. It's always about the money.



Hence IBOC interference issues outside of the ADI are not
a consideration. If you're going to argue objectionable interference, it
has to be within the ADI.

I don't think anyone is arguing against that point now. I think,
however, there is a lot of dismay among readers and posters that the
sales people are working with a model that doen't fit reality.


Actually, the sales people are working the ONLY reality: That the
only listeners that matter are the ones that are saleable. In the US,
Radio is always, and has always been about the money


They
then target their sales in exactly that way -- the local pizza joint
is of no use to a Miami listener, but J&R Music World certainly would
be.


It seems to be a self-perpetuating... myth, for lack of a better word.
Especially today, when people are more than willing to do commerce
cross-country for normally local items such as used cars.


People are willing to do business cross country. And advertisers buy
national radio. But radio is SOLD according to local numbers. Skywave
numbers are not statistically present, nor practically operable.
Literally, to few, to far between to be useful.

Look at it this way: Radio has two customers, listeners and
advertisers. The job of the guy on the air is to sell the listeners to
the advertisers. To set the price, the guy on the air needs to have hard
numbers...how many are listening, in which zipcodes, at what times, in
what demographic groups, and for how long. And then those numbers are
compared to the advertiser's target customer in the zip codes in which
the advertiser does the bulk of his/her business. There are other
factors, for the purpose of this illustration, these are the important
ones.

Now, say you have listeners 400 miles away, well out of the
groundwave, and well into skywave. How many do you expect there to be in
any give zip code? 10? 100? If the conversion ratio of sales to
impressions is 1 in 10, that means to buy that station, one could expect
between 1 and 10 sales to result from a given period's advertising. 1 in
10 is very optimistic. So,the cost/benefit ratio is too high for that
buy. Now in the case of a mail order business such as, taking your
example, J&R, yes a clear channel station could produce a few sales here
and there though skywave listening, but consider, that the numbers,
again, are small compared to the local audience. And it's the size and
listening frequency of the local audience that sets the rate for the J&R
buy. Again, there is no statistical benefit to including the skywave
listener. Making any measurement of the skywave audience prohibitively
expensive.

Either way, they don't matter in the real world of Radio. Because
they produce no revenue enhancement.



...and back in the 70s, certainly there was absolutely no excuse for
not knowing your coverage pattern. WABC was a clear channel station,
back when there were clear channels. Why have the clear channel
status if not for the coverage area?

Clears were established when radio was in it's infancy. When audience
measurements were clumsy, and before the psychographic nature or
listening was understood. Those were also different times. Like the 60's
and 70's when Radio was in its adolescence, Radio use was not the same.
Programming was done through much different means, often by people who
did not really understand the potential of the medium. Today, Radio is
a mature product. And it's programmed and sold in a much different way
than it was then. With unjustifiable expenses cut (and some justifiable
ones as well) and among those, are the catering to the skywave audience.

And a lot of what was going on when you were hearing long distance
dedications on CKLW was show biz. It may or may not correspond to the
reality of the business model. A definite perception was catered to,
there. But that's all it was: a perception. Get a listener from South
Fox Crotch, stroke them a little on the air, send a post card, and a
t-shirt. Play up the strength of the station as a national powerhouse.
While what really mattered, What ONLY mattered was the local ratings.
LOCAL. Because they were saleable.

What you hear on the air is showbiz. Bigger than life. More important
than God. But that's just the show.

King Kong is still only 3 foot 6.



As for the CKLW target. Practically speaking, the were a Detroit
station. And they sold the Detroit market. Nonetheless, they were a
Canadian station, and different rules, different business models apply
than those for US stations. Targets are one thing. Rules are another.
And location determines the rules. Not targets.

One of the things that's easily forgotten, is that Radio is an
entertainment business. (loose definitions apply.) What you hear is
often not really what it seems. There's a lot behind the curtain that is
intentionally not on display before the listening audience. Meaning that
what you hear is often not what you get.

A long distance dedication is a great ego boost to the jocks at the
station and the PD running the show. It's great to have your name
smeared across multiple states.

But as a practical business tool, it's only an imaginary benefit. The
business model is something quite different. And practical realities far
more limited than what's implied to those on your side of the grille cloth.

IMHO, the IBOC debacle will be as harmful to AM radio as the
elimination of clear channel designations. Some bureaucrat with the
heart of a calculator is going to wonder why ad revenue is dropping,
all the while looking at unchanging numbers massaged to fit his faulty
model his coverage area.

Actually, his model gets more accurate every day. What changes is the
amount of effort he's willing to put forth to serve it. Truth is that
few Radio Executives recognize any benefit to doing things the hard
way...or the expensive way. When cheap and simple sells just as well....

And it's always about the money.